Friday, February 01, 2013

Money in Politics This Week

Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest
news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics—and
the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll
also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national
scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Syed Zaidi.

In a Times-Union op-ed, Sean Eldridge,
president of Hudson River Ventures, calls on politicians to get serious about
reform. Eldridge notes that New York’s antiquated campaign finance system is
built for big donors, not average voters. Wealthy contributors can donate $60,800
to some state candidates—ten times more than what they can give to presidential
candidates. Numerous loopholes such as political party “housekeeping” accounts
and separate limits for affiliated corporations can eviscerate even New York’s extremely
high limits. It is no surprise then that “elected officials are encouraged to
spend their time with the wealthy and the well-connected, and cater to the
special interests of very few, instead of the constituents who put them
in office.” Furthermore, these excessive contributions skew the market in
favor of select businesses with political ties. Tax loopholes, pay-to-play
antics, and special interest projects tremendously benefit a few key groups but
waste our taxpayer dollars. In order to generate long-term economic growth, New
York needs to eliminate special treatment for the well-connected and foster an
open marketplace free from corruption.

Tkaczyk Wins State Senate Race against
Incumbent Assemblyman Amedore

The last undecided New York State Senate race has finally been
resolved. Last Friday, George Amedore conceded to his opponent, Cecilia
Tkaczyk. Tkaczyk won by a mere 19 votes,
making this race the second-closest in Senate history. The contest was
prolonged by legal battles over 887 ballots out of nearly 126,000 that were
cast. As The Nation notes “Tkaczyk faced
daunting odds. A poll one month out showed her down by twelve points. She was
running with a cash disadvantage, in a GOP-gerrymandered district, with little
name recognition and a hard-to-pronounce name. With little left to lose, Tkaczyk
and the key groups supporting her made the race a referendum on democracy
itself. In the mail and at the doors, they let the voters know that a vote for
Tkaczyk was a vote for publicly financed elections.” While the furious recount
was underway, Tkacyzk publicly affirmed in a Times-Union op-ed that campaign finance reform was her campaign’s core
issue. “If I do get sworn in, I’ll know my support for public financing is a
central reason I won the job.” Now that the job is hers, the prospects for Fair
Elections legislation have picked up some steam.

68 Percent of New Yorkers Rate
Campaign Finance Reform as a High Priority

Two
weeks ago, the Sienna
Research Institute found that59 percent of New Yorkers support a public
financing and 79 percent support improved public disclosure of political
contributions. This week, a Quinnipiac
Poll reaffirmed these findings. When voters were asked if Governor Cuomo
and the legislature should give campaign finance reform the highest priority, a
high priority but not the highest, or a lower priority; 31 percent rated it as
the highest priority and 37 percent as a high priority. Support for reform
appears consistently strong across partisan lines. Fifty-nine percent of Republicans,
68 percent of Democrats, and 73 percent of Independents ranked campaign finance
reform as a high or the highest priority.

NATIONAL

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
Upholds WV Disclosure Law

In West Virginia, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld
large portions of the state’s disclosure law. The
case, Center for Individual Freedom v. Tennant, involved a provision in the law requiring the disclosure
of the donors to organizations that sponsor “electioneering communications”—political
ads which mention candidates by name and are released within a certain number
of days before an election. The Fourth Circuit reversed an earlier district
court decision, by insisting that the state
may require organizations engaged in political spending (“electioneering
communications” or otherwise) to disclose their donors, unless the donor expressly
prohibits his or her funds from being used for political purposes. The Brennan
Center filed a brief in the case, urging
the Court of Appeals to uphold West Virginia’s broad definition of
electioneering communications, which includes newspaper and print ads, as subject
to disclosure. The Fourth Circuit affirmed that the state can
constitutionally require the disclosure of both broadcast and non-broadcast
media, observing that “there is no reason why the public would not have [the
same] interest in knowing the source of campaign-related spending . . . [in]
print” as it does in broadcast ads.

Obama Launches 501(c)(4) non-profit to Push
his Agenda

President
Obama is launching a non-profit 501(c)(4) organization called Organizing for
Action in support of his policy agenda. The Obama campaign will lease some
valuable assets to the new group, allowing Organizing for America to employ
large swaths of sophisticated databases and software, as well as trusted staff
that helped propel him to two consecutive Presidential terms. The proposed structure
of the organization, which includes a network of local chapters, closely
resembles Americans for Prosperity—the conservative group attacked by liberals
throughout the 2012 election cycle for launching hard-hitting advertisements
and not disclosing its donors. Although OFA officials have stated that the
group’s donors will be made public, the organization can choose what to reveal since
disclosure is not mandated by law. Despite the President’s enthusiasm for
campaign finance reform on reddit,
this instance appears to be another in a series
of flip-flops on the topic.

Proposal
to Gut Maine Clean Elections Fund Draws Protests

In
response to Governor Paul LePage’s budget proposal to cut $4 million from the
Maine Clean Elections Fund, Mainers
converged at the State House in protest. Members of the Maine Citizens for
Clean Elections gathered over 11,000 postcards in support of the program from
residents around the state. The demonstration also marked the three year anniversary
of Citizens United v. FEC. The advocates used the opportunity to push the
state legislature to adopt a resolution in support of the proposed 28th
Amendment that would remove legal personhood status from corporations. "More
than 25 towns have passed resolutions in Maine calling for a U.S.
constitutional amendment on campaign finance and already we have 11 state
legislatures that have urged Congress to pass a constitutional amendment, and
we're hoping to make Maine the 12th state," stated Andrew Bossie,
executive director of the Maine Citizens for Clean Elections.

Great Deal for Special Interests in
Fiscal Cliff Deal

The passage of the fiscal cliff deal demonstrates how campaign
contributions can be connected to policies that benefit special interests at the
expense of taxpayers and the public. A recent investigation
by the New York Times reveals
that Amgen, the world’s largest biotech company, garnered an exemption on a
provision requiring Medicare to pay a single, bundled rate for dialysis
treatment and related medications. Consequently Amgen’s drug, Sensipar, will
not be subject to the new Medicare cost-cutting price restraints on dialysis medications.
The exemption will cost Medicare $500 million over two years. Not surprisingly
Amgen’s employees and its political action committee have
contributed almost $68,000 to Senator Max Baucus (D-MN) and $59,000 to
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), both of whom have prominent positions on the Senate
Finance Committee, which considered the fiscal
cliff legislation. The company also has 74 lobbyists in D.C., many of whom
have served on staff for Senator Baucus and Hatch in the past.